Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
-down with the speaker of the house, john boehner, mr. speaker boehner came out and told reporter that is the treasury secretary offered no new substantive plan and would not address the issue of spending cuts at all. as we reported on this show yesterday, it is no longer clear that the white house even wants spending cuts in this initial deal. it wants solely tax hikes, or at least that's all that it's been talking about x that now -- that dichotomy -- is becoming a big issue. here's the speaker. >> two weeks ago we had a very productive conversation at the white house. but based on where we stand today, i would say two things. first, despite the claims that the president supports a balanced approach, democrats have yet to get serious about real spending cuts. and secondly, no substantive progress has been made in the talks between the white house and the house over the last two weeks. megyn: well, meantime, senate majority leader harry reid argues he is still waiting for a reasonable proposal from republicans. this all comes after a leading voice on debt taxes and spending warned about the cost of n
to a national debt that already stands at $16 trillion. moments ago, speaker of the house speaker boehner saying that the democrats plan is not going to fly. >> the white house took three weeks to respond with any kind of a proposal, much to my disappointment. it was not a serious one. megyn: tom bevan is the editor of real clear it seems that even left-leaning pundits and analysts admit that this is not a serious proposal by the white house and it is clear that the democrats and president obama cannot could not believe that the republicans would agree to this. so what is going on here? >> well, that's a great question. we are doing this kabuki dance now. obama put this proposal out there so that republicans would have a chance to negotiate with him. he started with this outrageous proposal and look at what we have been able to negotiate. $1.6 trillion in tax increases down to under a trillion dollars. something like that. but there is other thinking that the president simply is not serious -- but he that he wants to go over the cliff and force in 2013, early 2013, put forward afte
from going forward. and the reality is last year speaker boehner set an important resident. it's called the boehner rule. one dollar in spending increase for one dollar for debt limit increase. you balance the budge net 10 years without raising taxes. the republicans aren't giving this up any time and neither are democrats. megyn: do you see irony that the president wants to eliminate congress from raising the debt limit. when he was a senator he said in part we are debating raising a debt limit and he said this is a sign of leadership failure. increasing america's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. washington is shifting the burden on the backs of our children and grandchildren. america has a debt problem and a failure of leadership and america deserves better. >> it's true when bill clinton left office in 2000 we had you are plus and the deficit would have been eliminated as we sit here today what changed that was the republican president and congress. what put us on the path we are on now is not democrats. we would have no collective debt at all if we had left in place
criticism from republicans who say wasn't serious. how speaker john boehner said he was flabbergasted. mitch mcconnell reportedly laughed out loud and in this debate over reducing the debt, the president is pushing for an additional $255 billion in spending. he wants those higher taxes to spend more, which is leading to some criticism. joining me now is brad blakeman, the former deputy to george w. bush. and chairman of the south carolina democratic party. a deal that is all about the republicans desire to cut back on the debt and deficit -- why would the president be proposing $255 billion in war spending? >> well, he's not. what he is proposing is shifting spending priorities. after those cuts, shifting priorities, and by the way -- this is infrastructure development. this is to make sure that people who have gone the payroll tax relief keep that payroll tax relief and expanding unemployment benefits. i will say this. this is the president's initial proposal. the silence from the republicans is deafening. they can counter this. but all they have done is whine and weep and cry and laugh abo
boehner's offer in the fiscal cliff talks is that this is going to happen no matter what. they talked about holding the line -- megyn: no, wait, wait, wait, let me interrupt because i just don't want to confuse the two, because all the taxes are confusing. i'm saying this surtax, this .9 income tax surtax, and then this 3.8% surtax on nearly all capital gains, that is happening irrespective of what happens with the fiscal cliff negotiations? >> almost certainly. unless somehow it became part of the negotiations to turn it off, but i'm not hearing that. megyn: okay. so then on top of that you got to fiscal cliff discussions in washington where the president wants to raise the income tax on top earners by another 3% or so in addition to this, these taxes you and i were just discussing. >> yeah. and that's a crucial point, because obama has repeatedly said he wants to go back to clinton era rates, but that ignores this new surtax at the beginning of the year. if they take the top rate from 35 to 39.6, it'll actually be 43.4 on investment income because we'll have that additional surtax o
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)